Pakistan faces 26/11 everyday: Mani Shankar Aiyar

[Bang Galore]

But let me define the fundamentals, and all you have to do is to nod in consent.
(b) Amendment of the Constitution periodically every ten years;

Amendment after 10 years. Why? There should be no messing around with the constitution unless absolutely necessary.

(h) Promotions after ten, fifteen, twenty and twenty-five years of service, and all individuals with greater than twenty-five years of service to be restricted to vacancies, for Administrators and Policemen and government employees;

Not sure what you are suggesting here. Years in service to be the only criteria? You don't think that diminishes any drive that an individual may demonstrate?

(k) Privatising Indian Railways;

Monopoly, won't work. An autonomous body would be a better idea.

(s) Introduction of proportional representation in elections;

Not advisable. We would be better off with a two stage , run off elections thereby ensuring that the winning candidate gets 50% of the vote and that no one disliked by the majority of voters manages to sneak in because of vote division.

(t) Retirement of one-third of legislature each year;

Theoretically, that would mean a new government possible every year. Nightmare scenario.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Amendment after 10 years. Why? There should be no messing around with the constitution unless absolutely necessary.(1)

Not sure what you are suggesting here. Years in service to be the only criteria? You don't think that diminishes any drive that an individual may demonstrate?(2)

Monopoly, won't work. An autonomous body would be a better idea.(3)

Not advisable. We would be better off with a two stage , run off elections thereby ensuring that the winning candidate gets 50% of the vote and that no one disliked by the majority of voters manages to sneak in because of vote division.(4)

Theoretically, that would mean a new government possible every year. Nightmare scenario.(5)

To be honest, every one of your proposals is very sensible by itself. My points were meant to illustrate that there is no shortage of bright ideas, many of them substantially better than the pathetic crap that Hindutva chairborne marshals manage to regurgitate (kindly note both the sequence and connotation of noun and verb). Having said that, these are not matters to die at the stake for, IMO. Let us pass this motion for amendment by voice vote.

 

[rubyjackass]

Tehelka is hardly a credible piece and if you are aware there are many "kum kum" and "turmeric" sprinkled stone idols all over India being worshipped...in street corners..under peepal trees etc. Many Nagakanya, Nagalakshmi idols in my place are just cylindrical structures of stone.

Pfft... Tehelka is not credible?! What is credible then? Saamna?!
By the way, the author is an academic, an assistant professor in University of Hyderabad.
So what if we worship even small rocks? Charminar should be a protected structure.

And the writer clearly errs when she says the Nirmohis "somehow" came up with the idea of a demolished temple when the ASI has clearly and irrefutably proved the existence of temple ruins beneath the mosque.

You have to read up on history. Nirmohis were the original mandirists. The brigade of RSS, VHP, BJP just hijacked the Nirmohi's case or in their words made it a popular cause. ASI did not survey the place until the 70s.

She tries to equate the denial of permission to worship on the Char Minar to allowing worship outside the Char Minar. Likewise many unintentional or intentional errors.

The temple is too close to Charminar. Her equation is valid.

But she also gives a pointer to the communal politics of MIM to inculcate a fear psychosis among the Muslims..

Because she is not a bigot and wrote a well-researched article based on facts.

p.s.: So many unrelated posts in a single thread...damn the idiotic policy to restrict posting on each other's walls;;



Even though it happened centuries ago, it was never accepted by the people and there were numerous localized attempts throughout the entire time span to recapture Ayodhya and reconstruct the temple there. It was not a issue that started in the 90s or even 40s..It started long back..

It was never accepted by people because there are always somebody like RSS to whip up people's passions.

Mate, Ayodhya is non-negotiable. Period.

Sadly, it will in fact be non-negotiable with such dangerous attitude. I hope the SC will declare the mosque as 1950 status-quo structure and make it non-negotiable for you.

I may be brought around to the point that the way in which the structure was taken down can be condemned..but never to the point that the structure needs to be standing there. It simply had to go..one day or other. What could have been done is an organized way of shifting the structure some distance away and a temple built there like it was done in Somnath. That is the best solution I could think of.

Well, for such an organized shifting of structure, the champions of Hindutva could have negotiated, which they were unwilling to do. The group that wants to change the status-quo should try to initiate the negotiation. But then, for these saffron groups, the goal is not the temple, but a win over Islam.

I say this again. This is not the time for scoring religious victories for Hindutva or even for Hinduism. We live in 21st century India. Citing religious claims for encroachment is dangerous. The best win for India would be excavation of the place and storing the remains if they are indeed genuinely historic.

 

[vsdoc]

Doc; yes and no. What you have drawn attention to is social. It was given legal sanction even muscle by Nehru AND OTHERS of his generation. Actually Nehru AND his contemporaries went BEYOND what you have highlighted. That is the CRUCIAL part.

I do think that was the general import of what Bang Galore sought to say. If so, I see no reason to disagree at all. As for Nehru (warts and all- I see many warts) represented what was idealistic in Democracy that the founding fathers envisaged. In my view he was the largest symbol of that group. As well as the most widely accepted symbol. One could'nt say that of Patel, Ambedkar or Azad for example. Though they were great personalities in their own rightHence the attention. That neither diminishes or detracts from his short-comings.

Let me take a deep breath and re-frame what I wanted to say again.

I do not wish to belittle Nehru or Gandhi or even Jinnah.

They were far bigger men than most of us will ever be.

They were there at the time.

And they did what they thought needed doing.

A turning point in the history of an ancient civilization as what 1947 was, does not come everyday.

Equally, I am not assuming that Bang Galore is belittling others by eulogizing only Nehru. Not at all.

A movement is made up of all kinds, and has many faces. Some we see, some we do not. Some are remembered more than others.

My point was and is simple. And this is as much in answer to Bang Galore as it is to your views quoted here.

A personality, no matter how towering, is but a single man.

Legal sanction is only worth the paper it is written on unless it has mass acceptance and buy in.

There is no muscle Nehru or any others during or after him (including his much stronger daughter) could bring to bear on a nation of now 850 million Hindus IF they were not inherently secular or IF they did not want to remain secular and tolerant of other resident faiths.

I repeat.

India became secular because the founders of the nation worded our guiding principles as such.

The founders of our nation were not aliens. They were Indians from amongst the land and the collective DNA of an ancient civilization. Hindu and Muslim, Brahmin and Dalit, Sikh and Christian and Jain and Buddhist and Parsi.

But above all, India grew and evolved and fought and killed and made up and went along for generation AFTER our founders had passed on, and REMAINED SECULAR, because every successive generation inherently was secular and wanted to remain so.

If that were not the case, Indira Gandhi could have done nothing.

The Indian Constitution, Parliament, and Judiciary could have done nothing.

The Indian Army could have done nothing.

 

[indushek]

What is it?

That sir is a temple and is the source of trouble in that part of city recently.

Can anybody tell me what is a liberal airhead?? my score of this F test seems to be 2.733. WTF is that liberal airhead thing cant find much that essays on this on google??

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Let me take a deep breath and re-frame what I wanted to say again.

I do not wish to belittle Nehru or Gandhi or even Jinnah.

They were far bigger men than most of us will ever be.

They were there at the time.

And they did what they thought needed doing.

A turning point in the history of an ancient civilization as what 1947 was, does not come everyday.

Equally, I am not assuming that Bang Galore is belittling others by eulogizing only Nehru. Not at all.

A movement is made up of all kinds, and has many faces. Some we see, some we do not. Some are remembered more than others.

My point was and is simple. And this is as much in answer to Bang Galore as it is to your views quoted here.

A personality, no matter how towering, is but a single man.

Legal sanction is only worth the paper it is written on unless it has mass acceptance and buy in.

There is no muscle Nehru or any others during or after him (including his much stronger daughter) could bring to bear on a nation of now 850 million Hindus IF they were not inherently secular or IF they did not want to remain secular and tolerant of other resident faiths.

I repeat.

India became secular because the founders of the nation worded our guiding principles as such.

The founders of our nation were not aliens. They were Indians from amongst the land and the collective DNA of an ancient civilization. Hindu and Muslim, Brahmin and Dalit, Sikh and Christian and Jain and Buddhist and Parsi.

But above all, India grew and evolved and fought and killed and made up and went along for generation AFTER our founders had passed on, and REMAINED SECULAR, because every successive generation inherently was secular and wanted to remain so.

If that were not the case, Indira Gandhi could have done nothing.

The Indian Constitution, Parliament, and Judiciary could have done nothing.

The Indian Army could have done nothing.

@vsdoc (and @Bang Galore),
I do get the drift of what you are saying, it does not seem to be too different from what Bang Galore says. Actually, both of you admirably complement each other in helping us to see the larger picture.

What we can probably conclude is that: the social system and the legal system have in fact supported each other towards towards a commonly perceived goal. Though it it would not be wrong to recognise that both (or either) have sometimes faltered. So the interactive support was crucial to bring us to where we are in our journey towards our destiny. That is the part that gives me (as an ordinary citizen) both a sense of some comfort and some satisfaction.

 

[rubyjackass]

That sir is a temple and is the source of trouble in that part of city recently.

So what is the point? There is enough evidence to prove that there was no temple by the 60s.

@KS: Is the photo dated?

Can anybody tell me what is a liberal airhead?? my score of this F test seems to be 2.733. WTF is that liberal airhead thing cant find much that essays on this on google??

A liberal airhead is probably one whose head is filled with nothing but liberal air.

 

[indushek]

So what is the point? There is enough evidence to prove that there was no temple by the 60s.

@KS: Is the photo dated?

A liberal airhead is probably one whose head is filled with nothing but liberal air.

I have no idea about that issue man, anyways MIM goons and Bajrang Dal or VHP slug it out often particularly for Hanuman Jayanthi. MIM recently withdrew their support to Congress on raise of a tarpaulin on this temple of sorts.

Whatever that means!!! anyway thanks for clarification or suggestion on the term.

 

[bronxbull]

I don't agree with his last two paras, but the rest of it is eminently sensible, an honourable and decent way of looking at things. And then there is Dmitri.....

Mani Shankar Iyer barking off the wrong orifice time and again.

I ll donate him and his brother to pakistan.